On the 26th May 2003 a public question asked whether or not Council had a significant tree register and if one wasn’t in existence, when it would get off the ground. Twelve years later, residents are still waiting for any sign of a tree register. After numerous revisits to the issue, there is yet another officer report in this week’s agenda. Mind, not a report by the Local Law Committee which for the past 2 years has been charged with delivering the ‘framework’ for the introduction of a Local Law. Residents remain excluded from the documentation, the reasoning, any actual draft. What is now put into the public domain is an unnamed officer report that finally reveals the real agenda of council. One of the recommendations is designed to scuttle the issue of a tree register for good. – ie Resolve not to proceed with Item 7i in the Community Plan Action Plan for 2014-15.
Given past voting on anything to do with this issue we anticipate that trees will continue to be an endangered species in Glen Eira and developers will continue to moonscape sites without fear of penalty. This judgement is based on previous councillor comments and, unless they have seen the light, we do not anticipate any change. (See: https://gleneira.wordpress.com/2013/10/16/still-going-round-the-mulberry-bush-10-years-on/ AND https://gleneira.wordpress.com/2013/10/14/the-saga-of-the-tree-register/
The other ‘advantage’ in killing off the idea for a tree register now is that it will then not proceed to be part of any ‘review’ of the Local Law. That means that there will be no public consultation on the issue since any amendment to the Local Law mandates public submissions. The intent in our view is clear – to do nothing and to prevent the community from having any say in the matter! This is again in spite of the specific resolution passed on the 27th April 2011. Another example of where resolutions in Glen Eira mean absolutely nothing! The resolution read:
Crs Pilling/Tang
That Council:
- Creates a classified tree register based on identification of trees whichmeet the criteria in attachment 1, and
- Drafts a Local Law to give effect to management and protection of trees listed on the classified tree register.
The MOTION was put and CARRIED.
It is quite unconscionable that the unnamed officer report can only manage two pages on an issue that is so contentious and when report after report (especially the recent Open Space Strategy) emphasises the importance that residents place on trees. Further, this report makes no mention of the above resolution. It refers only to the ‘aspirational’ component of the Council Plan! And of these two pages, the first page is nothing more than gobbledygook – short on truth, facts, and relevance. It again parades the nonsense of how well Glen Eira protects ‘200 valued trees’ via its planning application process. Given the admission that over 1200 applications come in each year (and one Magee claim is for over 1500 applications per annum and likely to be far more by now) then this surely represents a paltry figure of ‘protection’ – even granted that many applications will not have ‘valued trees’ on the property. What this also does not take into account is how many amended permits are submitted to REMOVE trees from a development and how many of these Council approves.
The greatest distortion of reality comes with this set of sentences – The ResCode mechanism is that any tree removed within 12 months of a town planning application being lodged must be assessed as though the ‘removed’ tree is still in place. This has proven to be somewhat of a defacto tree retention control because it has effectively removed any advantage a developer could gain from moonscaping. This means that any town planning application for medium density dwellings needs to consider existing tree/vegetation.
A truck could literally be driven through this nonsense – and it has. None of this takes into account land banking where a developer purchases a property, and possibly rents it out for years, BEFORE any planning application is lodged. In the meantime of course, every ‘significant tree’ is removed.
In June last year we featured a post where a healthy and huge tree sitting on the title border was destroyed after the property had been purchased by a developer. A new tree has now been planted in this exact spot. Thus, when the planning application eventually goes in, council will simply determine that this sapling is anything but a ‘significant’ tree and grant permission for its removal. The developer escapes unscathed, unfined, and literally untouchable since he has exercised the wonderful ‘escape loop’ in the far from ‘effective’ planning process.
Here are the BEFORE AND AFTER photos of this site –
We have commented numerous times on this ‘no action’ council and how often it flies in the face of community views. Resolutions are passed only to be ignored and reneged upon. We reiterate: the community values its trees – not just on public land, but also private land. Given the rate of development, it is incumbent on councillors to ensure that every single avenue is pursued to protect the environment. We would go even further and suggest that Local Law protection is basically limited to mere officer decision making with again no decision making capacity by councillors (unless specifically spelt out) or by residents. Plenty of other councils (ie Whitehorse, Moonee Valley) have tree registers as part of their Planning Scheme. Such an option is naturally ‘verboten’ in Glen Eira since it would impinge on the current power structures and involve far more transparent and accountable decision making.
March 16, 2015 at 11:05 AM
Why help create an even bigger Nanny State?
March 16, 2015 at 2:38 PM
Driving around I hate seeing every single piece of land stripped bare where I know there were some big trees there before. That’s not being a nanny state. Its making sure that our kids can still breathe some fresh air and not expire from the heat and pay a fortune for cooling the place down. I don’t buy the idea that because it is your land you can do what you like. There are always laws and rules that limit what you can do and I think that is right.
March 16, 2015 at 11:50 AM
Sorry for not being on topic. Lipshutz is down for being the audit committee member once more. Great rotation and great governance.
March 16, 2015 at 5:19 PM
A new broom sweeping clean –
Mornington Peninsula Shire staff get boot in new chief executive’s ‘right sizing’ move
Christian Tatman
Mornington Peninsula Leader
March 16, 2015 4:25PM
NEW Mornington Peninsula Shire chief executive officer Carl Cowie has swung the axe, sacking several senior staff after a review of operations.
The Leader has been told up to 12 senior staff have lost their jobs after the review, which began shortly after Mr Cowie assumed control in December.
A source said two directors, along with managers, team leaders and a member of the communications department were told on Friday they no longer had jobs.
Mayor Bev Colomb said she expected to make a comment tomorrow.
“There were some dismissals. I am not making a statement until I have spoken to all my (councillor) colleagues,” she said.
Cr Colomb refused to be drawn on whether other staff would face the axe, which follows an organisational review by new CEO Carl Cowie.
In an email to staff on Friday, Mr Cowie referred to the dismissals as “right sizing” and told employees they had to see themselves as part of a business.
“I have genuine respect for those who will leave the organisation … and I regret that this is distressing for all,” he said.
“The departure of certain staff is a reflection of right sizing, not a reflection of competence.
“Work will continue within the shire to develop an organisational structure that best supports excellence in service delivery, every day, to our community.”
Mr Cowie said in the email he had completed the organisational review and was now starting to implement it.
“The first phase of the review considered a number of important changes to the senior management levels of the organisation.”
He told some staff viewed themselves as “Local Government” rather than a business, but told them to reassess this view.
“Please understand, when an entity attracts an income of $200 million plus, employs over 1000 staff, contracts with multi national companies to provide services, borrows millions of dollars to fund investment, it is a business,” he wrote in the email.
Mr Cowie said change was essential to put as much resources as possible into servicing the needs of the community.
“We exist as an organisation for them, not the other way around.
Mr Cowie said the shire needed to have as much funds as possible for capital and amenity.
“We need to lift our performance for our community and we need to deliver more things, on time and on budget.”
Mr Cowie has experience in healthcare, facilities management, transport, manufacturing and construction project management.
He holds qualifications in economics, finance, an MBA from Monash Mt Eliza Business School and has studied at Harvard’s School of Public Health in Boston.
He replaced former CEO Michael Kennedy, who was in the job for 15 years.
A shire spokeswoman told Leader a statement would be issued tomorrow.
March 16, 2015 at 5:50 PM
whoopee a ceo who gives a stuff about saving money
March 16, 2015 at 10:34 PM
I am convinced that good architectural design could save many trees from the chain saw. Developers are not interested in good design. They want to cram as many dog boxes onto each site as possible. Council bends over backwards to make this happen.
March 16, 2015 at 11:03 PM
Smart Aleck before you get too excited let’s wait and see who/if replaces those walked.